|
|
|
|
|
|
An Article
|
|
California law prohibits persons with restraining orders from possessing a gun
Some CAI lawyers include restraining orders in their battles against homeowners for economic control
May 05, 2005
By
AHRC News Services
Copyright AHRC News Services
|
|
|
|
| |
Some long time entrenched boards members of homeowners association and people who want to go around converting others to their brand of Christianity, are part of the "volunteer police" of the Orange County - California Sheriff Corona's office. They drive around in police cars and carry guns.
Mexicans, Asian Americans, Blacks and Europeans report that there are two levels of law enforcement in Orange County one for the entrenched old boy- white- wasp network and another for newcomers, minorities and immigrants.
Posted Aug 20 2005 10:07PM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
HOA Voices
, California |
| |
|
|
| |
It is a standing understanding, take away the guns, and only the crimnals will have the guns.
If someone is bent on having a gun, they will have a gun, and, I think we are all aware of people who have been harmed, or killed by a person who was not suppose to have a gun, but had a gun anyway.
Don't get me wrong. I would prefer that there would be a way to take away guns from criminally minded people, but it is not going to happen.
One can buy a gun on the street, albeit illegally, anywhere in America.
That is the way it is.
Posted May 10 2005 9:41PM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Sharon Stephens
(View Profile)
Cathedral City, California |
| |
|
|
| |
We have been the victims of this type abuse by our Homeowner Association. Our battle has been on going for 1 1/2 years.
We filed a lawsuit against our Homeowners Assocaiton in October of 2003 and what resulted was a Preliminary Injunction against us.
We live at Heritage Lake, a community approximately 50 miles West of Indianapolis. There are six subdivisions which make up the HOA, which surround a body of what called "Heritage Lake". The lake is not mentioned in any of the governing documents and is not a part of the scheme of the subdivision but this has not stopped the HOA from wrangling control of it.
The basin is owned by Clear Creek Conservancy District. The water is "State" water, however due to the size of the lake, appriximately 360 areas and for economic reasons, Indiana Department of Natural Resources does not patrol it. IDNR does have jurisdiction over fishing and hunting and does exercise their control of that aspect but when it comes to who actually has juristiction over boating operations on the water, well that is why we are in court.
Our Homeowner Association has taken it upon themselves to patrol the lake, make rules, which they make binding and mandatory to the members of the association, and even to issue tickets and to restrict a members access to the water, even if the member is an adjoining property owner.
Our question is, since when has a HOA been given the authority to issue tickets and fines to control their members over an area which is not a part of the scheme of the subdivision? They are not a police agency.
The HOA has gone so far as to require members to pay for HOA "decals" to be placed on their watercraft, apparently the State Identification numbers are not sufficent though we pay annually our excise tax for our watercraft and are required by State Law to display our State issued identification numbers and current excise tax decal. If a member fails to comply they are ticketed and fined and become members not in good standing.
This injustice has been allowed to continue for far too long and the illegality of it all compelled us to take a stand. A Special Judge, Judge Bolk, Vigo County, Indiana has had an evidentury hearing and both sides have presented their case and we are currently awaiting a ruling.
During this process of standing up for our Constitutional Rights, our HOA filed for a restraning order against us, which now has been converted to a Preliminary Injuction, and was granted by our wonderful judicial system, though the HOA did not meet the four elements to obtain one.
Their only complaint was that we refused to purchase and display a HOA "decal" on our watercraft and now we are restricted from lowering our watercraft off our lift on to the water. The injustice of it all. If the judicial system would follow the letter of the law these abuses would not be allowed to continue.
We believe if a HOA is held to the same standards as the rest of the population and required to adhere to the law, things will change. If homeowners united for a common purpose and forced the government to take action when abuses are reported, if there was a government agency to report them to, things like this would not be allowed to go on.
Posted May 6 2005 5:40PM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Wendie Johnson
Coatesville, Indiana |
| |
|
|
| |
I don't have a problem with someone who has a restraining order against them NOT allowed to own a gun. That is for my and everyone else's safety. It does not sound like the law was passed due to any connection to people living in an HOA. The law seems general in it's creation.
Each restraining order situation is different. However, the law simply doesn't allow for some differences to exist. I feel it's intention was to protect people in domestic violence or stalking situations. As someone who has been a victim of BOTH, I would appreciate a law that did not allow that person to own a gun but allowed me to. The victim now has a better chance at a "self-defense" defense in case something happens. The violator has a better chance of being convicted or have additional charges brought against them.
If the problem here is that people are getting restraining orders against them for no apparent reason then that may be an issue. It isn't an issue with the passed law preventing them from owning guns.
There are ways to get rid of a falsly obtained restraining order - usually in the court system and NOT with your HOA..
Unfortunnately, there will be unjust victims in this passed law, but in the overall scheme of things, getting guns out of criminals hands is a good thing.
Posted May 6 2005 2:49AM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Terry Pollime
(View Profile)
, Alabama |
| |
|
|
| |
On the back of every restraining order there is a box that asks: "Will this restraining order keep the person from their business?"
Most Homeowner Associations are small businesses, and if they check that box it is perjurious. EVERY HOMEOWNER HAS THE RIGHT TO ATTEND MEETINGS.
As for owning a gun?
I think we all know that other family members, not mentioned in a restraining order can own a gun, and therefore if one wants a gun in their home, it only needs to be registered in another family member's name.
Now, one should also keep in mind: If a criminal person wants a gun they will get one. If a non-criminal person wants a gun, they will get one, even if it is in another person's name.
It is amazing the control the government is acheiving over the population in HOAs -- "The New Internment Camps of The New World Order."
Posted May 5 2005 11:16PM CEST
|
| |
|
| |
Sharon Stephens
(View Profile)
Cathedral City, California |
| |
|
|
Return to 'California law prohibits persons with restraining orders from possessing a gun' |
Submit a comment
|
|
|
|
